\tThe Sanguozhi \u4e09\u56fd\u5fd7 "Records of the Three Kingdoms" is one of the official dynastic histories (zhengshi \u6b63\u53f2). Together with its predecessors Shiji \u53f2\u8bb0, Hanshu \u6c49\u4e66 andHouhanshu \u540e\u6c49\u4e66 it is one of the "four great histories" (sishi \u56db\u53f2) of ancient China. It describes separately the history of each of the so-called Three Kingdoms \u4e09\u56fd (220-280 CE) in a biographic-thematic style (jizhuanti \u7eaa\u4f20\u4f53). The author was Chen Shou \u9648\u5bff from the Jin period \u664b (265-420), the first commentator was Pei Songzhi \u88f4\u677e\u4e4b from the southern dynasty of Liu-Song \u5218\u5b8b (420-479). The Weishu \u9b4f\u4e66 "Book of Wei (sometimes also called Weizhi \u9b4f\u5fd7 "Records of Wei") contains the imperial and normal biographies of the kingdom (better: empire) of Wei, which was ruled by the family of Cao \u66f9, in 30 juan "scrolls", the Shushu \u8700\u4e66 "Book of Shu" (Shuzhi \u8700\u5fd7) that of the empire of Shu, ruled by the family of Liu \u5218 who claimed to be the righteous successors of the Han dynasty \u6c49 (206 BCE-220 CE), in 15 juan, and theWushu \u5434\u4e66 "Book of Wu" (Wuzhi \u5434\u5fd7) that of the southestern empire of Wu, which was ruled by the family of Sun \u5b59, in 20 juan, which makes for a total amount of 65juan.<\/p>\n
\tChen Shou was originally a high official at the court of Shu before he entred into the service of the Jin dynasty. It is not known when he completed his history of the Three Kingdoms period. For the Liu-Shu dynasty it was the first history written, but for the other two kingdoms there were already two histories on which Chen certainly relied. This was Wang Chen’s \u738b\u6c88 Weishu \u9b4f\u4e66 "Book of Wei", and Yu Huan's \u9c7c\u8c62 Weilüe \u9b4f\u7565 "A concise [history] of Wei".<\/p>\n
\tThe concurrent existence of three empires on Chinese soil posed a problem for a historian: Which one was the righteous dynasty to which Heaven had bestowed the so-called Heavenly mandate? The answer to this question was of far-reaching consequences for the calendar and and the claim of legitimation for the subsequent dynasties. In the eyes of the Jin dynasty the Cao-Wei family was accepted as the righteous rulers. The lords of the two other empires, therefore, could not be called "emperor" (di \u5e1d) but were only given the title of "ruler" (zhu \u4e3b). Chen Shou therefore speaks of "emperor" Wei Wudi \u9b4f\u6b66\u5e1d, but only of the "Former" and the "Later Ruler" (xianzhu \u5148\u4e3b, houzhu \u540e\u4e3b) of Shu and the "Ruler" of Wu. The last ruler of Wu submitted to the Jin dynasty and could therefore not be called "emperor": Sun Hao \u5b59\u7693 (r. 264-280) is only called sizhu \u55e3\u4e3b "the succeeding ruler" instead. Similarly, the wives of the rulers of Wei are called houfei "empresses and consorts", while that of the others are called feizi \u5983\u5b50 resp. feibin \u5983\u5ad4 "consorts". The events in the states of Shu and Wu are not dated with their own calendar but with the calendar of Wei, using the reign mottos of Wei. In the Jinshu \u664b\u4e66, the history of the Jin dynasty, the problem of parallel empires was solved in another way.
\tThere were unsubstantiated criticism against Chen Shou to have omitted a biography for Ding Yi \u4e01\u4eea and his son Ding Yi (2) \u4e01\u5ed9 from Shu, and to have written only a very short biography for Zhuge Liang \u8bf8\u845b\u4eae, prime minister of Shu. The latter is indeed true but the biography (Liezhuan 35) contains a lot of praise for Zhuge Liang. Yet what is surely not appropriate is Chen's overt praise for the founders of the Jin dynasty, the family of Sima \u53f8\u9a6c. Compared to the other three of the "Four histories" the Sanguozhi is rather short and lacks substance, especially in those matters going beyond the purely biographical accounts. Treatises, for example, are totally missing. The commentary of Pei Songzhi tried to solve some of the problems. He added missing information from more than 140 other books of which far the largest part is lost today, and corrected errors.<\/p>\n
\tOne chapter that often attracted attention is the earliest extant description of Japan (Liezhuan 41, sometimes called Woren zhuan \u502d\u4eba\u4f20).
\t <\/p>\n